Search Results for: coloradopols.com

Empty U.S. House chambers.

Politico:

With the country teetering on this fiscal cliff of deep spending cuts and sharp tax hikes, the philosophical differences, the shortened timetable and the political dynamics appear to be insurmountable hurdles for a bipartisan deal by New Year’s Day.

Hopes of a grand-bargain – to shave trillions of dollars off the deficit by cutting entitlement programs and raising revenue – are shattered. House Republicans already failed to pass their “Plan B” proposal. And now aides and senators say the White House’s smaller, fall-back plan floated last week is a non-starter among Republicans in Senate – much less the House.

On top of that, the Treasury Department announced Wednesday that the nation would hit the debt limit on Dec. 31, and would then have to take “extraordinary measures” to avoid exhausting the government’s borrowing limit in the New Year.

Adds the Washington Post:

If anything, hope for success appeared to have dimmed over the Christmas holiday. The Republican-controlled House last week abdicated responsibility for resolving the crisis, leaving all eyes on the Senate. But senior aides in both parties said Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) have not met or even spoken since leaving town for the weekend…

With no sign of urgency, aides in both parties predicted that failure was not just a possibility – it was rapidly becoming the most likely outcome. No significant movement was expected Thursday: Obama was scheduled to be in the air traveling back from his Hawaiian holiday for a good portion of the day, and the Senate wasn’t set to convene for votes until the evening.

Even if some miraculous breakthrough in the Senate could be achieved, another round of winter weather in the Washington, D.C. area this weekend could well disrupt air travel, making it difficult for House members to reconvene in time for a vote before the new year–and that assumes the Republican-controlled House of Representatives is a body capable of passing anything the President would be able to sign. After the failure before Christmas by Speaker John Boehner to pass his “Plan B” alternative measure, a red-on-red disaster abetted by at least two Colorado Republican members of Congress, dysfunction seems to be the rule.

The public is becoming increasingly, undeniably aware of who is to blame for the impasse, as a poll released yesterday shows once again–Huffington Post reports:

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats got a moderate boost in approval ratings for their handling of the crisis. Obama’s rating on the negotiations rose to a majority 54 percent, while approval for Democratic leaders in Congress jumped to 45 percent. Republicans did not see similar gains, with their number holding nearly steady at 26 percent. [Pols emphasis]

Any shift in approval didn’t appear to affect the desire for bipartisan deal-making. Just 22 percent of people said either side should stick to its principles, while 68 percent called for a compromise.

And this is the key: President Barack Obama has already compromised. A casual look at the offers the President has made, both increasing the threshold of income at which higher tax rates would apply, as well as offering entitlement rate-of-growth cuts that have genuinely upset liberal Democrats, and there’s no question which side has offered more to get a deal. We don’t really think the administration can offer much more without putting itself in a situation similar to that faced by Boehner–a fact made even clearer by the intense public opposition to cutting institutions like Social Security and Medicare. One small upshot is that as the scale of what can be achieved with an intransigent GOP-controlled House diminishes, so do the cuts.

Politically, it’s critical to understand that this is not 2009. There is no upwelling of conservative opposition brewing as was the case with the then-incipient “Tea Party.” The country has been through years of exactly this kind of obstruction and brinkmanship since Republicans retook control of the House in 2010. The voters want solutions. They are tired of rhetoric. What the polls show is a growing fatigue with Republican intransigence, and a growing understanding that it is Republican intransigence at the heart of much of their frustration with government.

It is not “bias” to acknowledge when one side is plainly losing.

Between now and New Year’s Eve, Colorado Pols is recapping the top ten stories in Colorado politics from the 2012 election year.

On Wednesday, October 3rd on the campus of the University of Denver, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney squared off against President Barack Obama in the first of three debates. Attended by an audience of DU students and a few politically connected non-students, it was a high profile moment for one of our state’s finest educational institutions.

As for President Obama, the consensus view is the Denver debate was not his finest hour.

Our live-blogger covering the event, as our readers know, didn’t think Obama had done all that badly, though we conceded at the time he “left a lot of points on the table and missed some opportunities to really clobber Romney.” It became clear in subsequent days, though, that the public overwhelmingly judged Obama the loser in this debate, appearing detached and even a bit annoyed with having to deal with an over-the-top fiery (and factually challenged) opponent. It has subsequently been acknowledged that Obama’s bookish and unengaging demeanor in the Denver debate was a deliberate strategy–one that is widely judged to have backfired.

In the 50-year history of televised presidential debates, only perhaps one or two are considered to have ultimately impacted the outcome of the election. The most frequently cited example is that of John F. Kennedy demolishing a sickly-looking Richard Nixon on live television in 1960. After Obama’s consensus-view loss to Romney in the first debate, Obama’s poll numbers indeed took a hit: but the fact is that Obama was in the lead prior to this debate, and he went on to win the election. By that simple standard, and despite the massive effort by Republicans to hype it into something more, the Denver debate was just a footnote. A debate performance only makes it into the history books when it relates to the candidate who ultimately won the election.

Does that mean there was no harm done, despite the fact that Obama ultimately prevailed in the election? Of course not, because in all probability there was some amount of electoral harm done–the loss of momentum following the Denver debate, albeit temporary, may well have cost Democrats incrementally down the ticket in other races around the country. Obama’s performance contributed to uncertainty among Democrats–as well as giddy hope among Republicans–that was in both cases unfounded. If the Obama campaign knew they would have more opportunities to take the fight to Romney in subsequent debates, it’s clear in retrospect that they misjudged just how much soft-pedaling they could get away with in Denver.

That said, the end result confirmed the fundamentals of this race, which the presidential debate at the University of Denver did little or nothing to alter.  

Between now and New Year’s Eve, Colorado Pols is recapping the top ten stories in Colorado politics from the 2012 election year.

Late on a Wednesday evening in January, Denver police attempted to stop a vehicle not far from the state capitol with legislative license plates they had observed driving erratically. The vehicle didn’t stop immediately, but proceeded several blocks before coming to an awkward stop near a bar frequented by state legislators, lobbyists, journalists and staff called Prohibition.

From that moment, the career of Republican Rep. Laura Bradford of Collbran began to unravel. Early reports from the Denver Police Department–later retracted under less-than-forthcoming circumstances–indicated that Bradford may have evaded arrest for driving under the influence by invoking legislative immunity granted to lawmakers during the legislative session.

Rep. Bradford was immediately stripped of her committee chair, and effectively made persona non grata in her caucus by Speaker Frank McNulty until she was “cleared” by the Denver Police Department and a subsequent ethics committee inquiry of wrongdoing (at least wrongdoing pertaining to abuse of her position). Bradford, despite her initial contrition over the incident, felt that she was being unfairly treated by McNulty throughout the process, and even briefly threatened to defect to Democrats–a lethal prospect for the GOP’s one-seat House majority.

In the end, though many questions about the conduct of both Rep. Bradford and responding Denver police officers remain unanswered, she was cleared; but not before her erratic response to the situation had rendered her politically nonviable in the eyes of Republicans both in Denver and her district. In March, Bradford announced she would not seek re-election.

The story of Laura Bradford has an amusing epilogue: Bradford’s Republican successor in HD-54, Rep.-elect Jared Wright of Fruita, has already perhaps set a new standard for disgrace on the campaign trail that nonetheless did not prevent victory. Wright, exposed as a lazy and dishonest police officer who lived embarrassingly beyond his taxpayer-funded means and was begged by fellow Republicans to pull out of the race, may be about to make former Rep. Bradford’s brush with scandal and intra-party intrigue a pleasant memory by comparison.

On the upside, it might not be as big a deal now, in a Republican minority.

It’s amazing what you can learn from an exhausted reindeer stopping by the barn for a hot mash before making his long journey back to the North pole. Straight from the reindeer’s mouth (by way of a certain Progressive CowPony acting as translator), a special Christmas bulletin on Santa’s visit to Colorado politicians’ households. Although some of Colorado’s elected officials landed on the naughty list, Santa (concerned that a lump of coal would be mistaken for a lobbyist’s gift) dropped personalized presents down the chimney for several figures of political prominence. Here’s a sampling:

Governor John Hickenlooper: Cheetos and goldfish.

State Senator Brophy: An industrial strength slingshot, so those melons won’t go unmolested after gun control passes.

Secretary of State Scott Gessler: One threatening letter, which may be used to escape responsibility for one future abuse of public funds.

Congressman Jared Polis: A partridge in a pear tree. He already had everything else…

Representative Max Tyler: Family-sized box of Enstrom’s milk chocolate toffee.

Congressman Ed Perlmutter: Winter coats for his staff, currently freezing in their mandatory ponchos.

Representative Jonathan Singer: Get-out-of-trouble-free card permitting ONE, and ONLY one “joint committee” or “high stakes” pun about Amendment 64 on the House floor.

Brian Watson: Free entry into an adult spelling bee.

Lang Sias: A newer edition of Photoshop for better sign clean-up the NEXT time he’s heralded as a “rising star” when jumping into a clearly lost race against a solid incumbent.

Attorney General John Suthers: A raise, pre-wrapped for regifting to the next person to hold his seat.

Representative Dan Pabon: Diapers and one good night’s sleep.

Secretary Ken Salazar: Large punch bowl, to be filled and kept handy for the next time a journalist upsets him. What are you talking about? He just offered that reporter a festive beverage! See, there’s another gallon of it right here, have a cup.

Congressman Mike Coffman: Body double willing to occasionally talk to CD6 constituents.

Denver Post Editorial Board: A list of people who may possibly run for Congress in 2014, besides the incumbents–with two years’ lead time, who knows, maybe they’ll endorse one.

If anyone else has Christmas intel on what Colorado’s boldface names found under their trees, post it in the comments…

UPDATE: FOX 31’s Eli Stokols answers one question:

Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma, and Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs, both planned to vote against Boehner’s “Plan B”, which was pulled from the floor Thursday night after Boehner failed to whip enough members of his divided GOP caucus in line…

According to talking points Lamborn gave his staff to pass on to constituents who bombarded the office with phone calls Thursday, the congressman “cannot support Plan B because it fails to give tax relief for one class of Americans.

“President Obama campaigned on a pledge to raise taxes, and Congressman Lamborn does not wish to assist him in raising taxes on any Americans,” the talking points continued. “Congressman Lamborn would like to see the Bush tax rates extended permanently for all Americans.”

Gardner, who is viewed as a rising star within the House GOP caucus but is closer to Majority Leader Eric Cantor than Boehner himself, “was not going to vote for it because it didn’t address spending at all,” according to spokeswoman Rachel George.

—–

Updating the fiscal cliff battle, Politico reports on yesterday’s dramatic failure in the House as Speaker John Boehner tried unsuccessfully to get the votes for his “Plan B” tax bill.

Things were so bad for Speaker John Boehner Thursday night, support for his Plan B tax bill so diminished, the limits of his power with his own party laid bare, that he stood in front of the House Republican Conference and recited the Serenity Prayer.

“God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

…It was supposed to be a moment of strength, a way to drag Obama and the Democrats toward them in the high-stakes fiscal cliff negotiations that have Washington teetering on the brink. Instead, it showed the world that either Boehner couldn’t bring 217 of his own members to his side, or they were unwilling to be led by him in this fight.

Yesterday’s failure by Speaker Boehner to pass his alternative measure significantly weakens his negotiating position. We haven’t heard whether any Colorado GOP representatives were part of the revolt; we expect that will come out soon enough. The House is reportedly on notice to be ready to head back to Washington, but this story indicates they may not reconvene before 2013–after the “fiscal cliff’s” mandatory spending cuts and tax increases have kicked in.

Rep. Mike Coffman had this to say to The Hill as the dust settled:

[A]fter a day and a half of intense lobbying on the part of the GOP leaders, rank-and-file members were stunned to learn that Boehner’s team was giving up the fight.

“I’ve never seen anything like it where leadership just completely backed down. I guess they made an assessment that the people who were no votes were entrenched no votes, because otherwise I think they would have just pulled it and they would have worked it longer,” Colorado Rep. Mike Coffman (R) told The Hill.

Coffman called the meeting “awful.” “It’s the first time I’ve ever seen leadership retreat. It was a real shock – the Speaker looked shocked,” he said.

It’s difficult to predict what’s going to happen next, but Boehner can only effectively negotiate as the leader of the House of Representatives if he has the power to lead. Otherwise it’s honestly not clear on whose behalf he is “negotiating.” Either way, Boehner’s leverage to continue demanding entitlement cuts opposed by the voting public in exchange for bringing his caucus along on a deal may have just evaporated. How many moderate Republicans would need to defect to a Democratic solution? It’s not that many, folks.

And Rep. Coffman’s remarks on yesterday’s failure to pass Boehner’s plan oblige us to consider whether speculation about Boehner’s speakership imploding is coming true.

For eight years, Colorado Pols has set the standard in this state as the most widely read and discussed blog devoted to coverage of Colorado politics. Almost 19,000 blog posts and nearly 500,000 comments later, this site has become an invaluable property for news and opinion about our state’s politics, and the collective wisdom of our authors and community members has become a trusted institution all by itself.

In January of 2013, we’re making major upgrades. We’ve been working for months on a complete redesign of Colorado Pols, and migration to a new software platform. For users, this will mean an enhanced experience, and far better organization of content. You’ll retain your same usernames and passwords once the conversion is complete. Front-page editors will still promote posts to the home page. Over time, we hope to roll out exciting new features, but in the meantime we’ve worked hard to preserve the community you’ve spent years inhabiting.

Best of all, this is a work in progress, and puts us in a position to be better responsive to requests from readers for future improvements. Use this space to freely discuss the types of features you’d like to see in an ideal Colorado political blog, and we’ll see what we can do.

We had great front page guest editors for the 2012 election season. Thanks very much to ClubTwitty, ProgressiveCowgirl, and SSG_Dan for their contributions to our blog in the last six months. Colorado Pols is the most read and discussed political blog in our state for eight years and counting because of our robust community of readers, and our elected front page guest editors represent the qualities we value in all of you.

We will hold an election for two new front-page guest editors this weekend, December 22nd and 23rd. The new editors will start on January 1st, and barring anything unexpected will hold their positions through June of 2013–at which time we’ll have another election. We’ll conduct one poll of nominees, and the top two finishers from that poll will win coveted front page editor spots. Our current editors are automatically renominated unless they decline.

Use this thread to nominate candidates for the two guest editor positions available. We’ll finalize the list of nominees tomorrow evening.

To learn more about the privileges and expectations of our guest editors, read this post, and feel free to ask questions. As always, we will be watching closely to ensure the election is fraud-free, so we remind readers as we do every time to not bother trying to cheat. We’ll catch you, and our whole community will join in humiliating you and everything you stand for.

We’re obliged to note Westword’s report out yesterday:

Secretary of State Scott Gessler has faced a lot of pushback for his efforts to identify immigrants who are illegally on Colorado’s voter rolls. But over the summer, those criticisms escalated to a new level when he received multiple violent threats, some targeting his family. Through an Open Records request, we now have new details on one disturbing phone call and the subsequent investigation — and more information is expected this week.

While the threats took place over the summer — and death threats toward politicians are not all that uncommon — these cases have a lot of significance now and will continue to be important in the coming months.

Why?

Because Gessler, a Republican and the state’s chief election officer, is currently the focus of criminal and ethics investigations, both the result of complaints from Colorado Ethics Watch, a watchdog group that has closely scrutinized Gessler on a number of issues. Based on open records requests it filed with the Secretary of State’s office, in October Ethics Watch alleged that Gessler had misused state funds for travels outside the scope of his office.

As Westword’s Sam Levin reports, a call placed to the state’s election information line last August turned into a long rant about the letters Gessler sent over the summer to registered voters he dubiously “suspected” may not be citizens. The caller said Republicans “should be shot in the head,” and indicated that “many people” know where Gessler’s family lives.

The call was investigated by the CBI, but Denver DA Mitch Morrissey declined to press charges. Investigation reportedly reveals this person made a similar threat toward Rep. Doug Lamborn last year, and Levin’s retelling of the CBI report paints a picture of a harmless, albeit very stupid, crackpot. That said, we don’t think anyone will dispute the necessity of taking any such threats made against the Secretary of State or his family seriously.

In terms of the investigation(s) underway regarding Gessler’s alleged misuse of discretionary funds, however, Westword’s Open Records Act request explains only one detail among numerous questionable incidents–from using these funds to attend partisan events at all, to “sweeping” the account empty at fiscal year’s end in a check to himself. Sympathy for Gessler over threats made against him or his family, which we’ll say again are totally unacceptable, doesn’t extend to excusing unethical or illegal behavior on his part.

But if any of you happen to recognize this crackpot, please let him know he’s not helping.